State of play: the score so far. Part I

[Ed: This is Part I of a letter by Dr Tomasz Slivnik, taking a close look at the current state of the Leadership and the legal issues surrounding it.]

A month ago I resigned from the NEC and subsequently wrote a letter explaining my reasons. It was published here, and was summarized and reported also in UKIP Daily. A month later, how is the Party doing?

In my opinion, the Party will not succeed if we all don’t at least try to follow the Party Constitution, particularly the party officers who are tasked with upholding it. If we don’t stand for the rule of law, what do we stand for and what is the point of UKIP?

How does the past month measure up?

Let’s ask this question first: who is the Leader of UKIP? Nigel has publicly declared himself as back in the job as the Interim Leader and also said “I keep trying to escape… and before I’m finally free they drag me back”. Apparently, he concluded that he was still the Leader by calling the Electoral Commission who told him they still record him as being the Leader.

What are the facts?

Under our Party Constitution, our Leader is elected:

“7.8 If there is only one valid nomination for the post of Party Leader the candidate so nominated shall be declared elected as Party Leader without the need for a ballot. Any contested election for the leadership shall be decided by a simple majority of the votes cast.”

and:

“7.3.2 Election for the post of Party Leader shall be by way of a postal ballot”.

A person becomes the Leader immediately upon being declared elected, either unopposed, or upon having received a simple majority of all the votes cast in a postal ballot.

Under Section 31 of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 it is then the Party Treasurer’s job to notify the Electoral Commission of the identity of the new Leader within 14 days. The Electoral Commission then records the changed details, as provided to them by the Party Treasurer.

The fact of the Electoral Commission recording the new details, however, has no significance to the person becoming the party Leader – neither to whether one becomes the Leader, or when one becomes the Leader. For example, the Leader does not become the Leader once the Electoral Commission is notified, or when the Electoral Commission records the correct details. One becomes the Leader when one becomes elected. The Electoral Commission merely records the information provided to them by the Party.

Of course, if Diane James spoiled her papers saying that she was signing them “under duress”, then the Electoral Commission might not have registered the change they were being notified of because the paperwork was deficient. However, this does not change the fact that Diane was, from the moment of her election, the Leader of the Party. Claiming that someone else is Leader because the Electoral Commission records do not reflect the accurate reality is disingenuous. All it means is that the Party (and specifically, the Party Treasurer) is in breach of its/his obligations under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, of having to notify the Electoral Commission who the Party’s new Leader is.

Furthermore, unless Diane has resigned according to the proper constitutional procedure, Diane James still is the Party Leader. The proper constitutional procedure is described in Article 7.7 of our Party Constitution which says that the resignation must be in writing and be addressed to the Party Chairman. Unless Diane has written and sent such a written letter (and as far as I am aware, she has not – indeed as I will explain below, I am certain she has not), she remains Leader of the Party and will remain such (implying all the legal powers and responsibilities) until she has done so.

Once she has done so (in the current surreal atmosphere of resignations, un-resignations and un-un-resignations, I would be remiss not to qualify this with “if she ever does so”, without suggesting that Diane so lacks credibility as to want to join the fun of the circus) the office of the Party Leader will then become vacant. It will then be the NEC who will appoint an Interim Leader.

It is not anyone else’s prerogative to do so. Not Nigel’s, and not Paul Oaken’s – at least, that is, if we have any regard for constitutional propriety. Whether we do or don’t, time will soon tell.

The reason I say it’s not Paul Oakden’s prerogative is because it appears that this is precisely what Paul Oakden seems to have done.

The NEC has not (yet) voted to appoint an Interim Leader. Thus, constitutionally, there is currently no Interim Leader, and indeed there may be no occasion for there to be one, if Diane has not yet correctly resigned. What has, instead, happened is that Nigel has publicly announced that he was Interim Leader and Paul Oakden then rang around some members of the NEC (not even all members of the NEC – a number of members of the NEC were not contacted at all before Paul Oakden announced in a national mailshot that Nigel has been made Interim Leader) urging them to not have any objection to Nigel being made Interim Leader. Some of them, I understand, conceded, some of them, I understand, reluctantly. I further understand the NEC is now due to discuss this matter formally on Monday 17 October. In the context of both Nigel and Paul Oakden having publicly announced that Nigel was Interim Leader, how prejudiced (or not) do you think the NEC’s proper constitutional decision has been?

Our score so far on the compliance with the Party Constitution: 0 out of 1.

Next question: who is the Party Chairman?

When Paul Oakden was appointed interim Party Chairman (I was at that NEC meeting), there was considerable reluctance on the part of many NEC members to approve this appointment. A compromise was reached and the necessary NEC consent was given under the condition – and only under that condition! – that the consent, and Paul’s appointment, expressly lapsed upon the election of the new Party Leader, whereupon Paul’s office as interim Party Chairman would automatically terminate.

Paul kept his employment contract as Party Director, and upon election of Diane James as Party Leader, he ceased being interim Party Chairman and became (solely) the Party Director again. The office of Party Chairman became vacant at that point and will remain vacant until the Party Leader, with the consent of the NEC, appoints a new Party Chairman. Indeed, at the time we appointed him, Paul assured us that this is also what he wanted – he promised us to attend the Party Conference in September with his resignation letter in his pocket and went further and said that he so much did not want the Party Chairman’s job that if the new Leader offered him one, he would not take it.

Since I believe that legally, Diane James is still the Party Leader, she is the one who – of course, with the consent of the NEC – has to appoint a new Party Chairman. Moreover, she has to appoint a Party Chairman if she wants to resign, as otherwise she cannot formally resign, because she can only do so by sending a written letter to the Party Chairman, and she cannot do so if the office of the Party Chairman is vacant. Since that office became vacant when she was elected, she could not possibly properly have sent that letter yet.

Thus my question is: why and on what basis is Paul Oakden still sending out letters signed as Party Chairman, and why does everyone still treat him as one, although, constitutionally, he is not?

Our score so far on the compliance with the Party Constitution: 0 out of 2.

21 Comments

Paul Icini
on October 16, 2016 at 2:19 pm

@ Donald.

I’d have voted for Woolfe the first time, I intended to do so the second, prior the the ‘scuffle’ but now I’m not so sure. What is it with these people., where is the common sense ?
I heard Kassam on the radio yesterday and was impressed, he fielded (not very hostile) questioning with ease. Speaks well and sounds sincere. Question is.. is he talking from conviction or is this just a fast track career ploy ? Ambition is fine but there is rather too much of this in the top and second tiers in our party.
The difficulty is there is not much time to get on with things and we will be stuck, for at least a while, with whoever we choose. An interesting conundrum !

Those are just my thoughts entirely, Raheem talks the talk but can he walk the walk? I am not 100% convinced. He just has not been around long enough for my liking and I for one am not willing to take the risk, I am not sure I want to go where he wishes to take us.

Having said that he does speak with confidence and ability, but even that seems a bit ‘cocky’ to me, if you get my meaning. Plus, he is still quite young so has he got enough experience, however, like you say it might be worth giving him a try. But don’t forget he has worked very closely with Nigel in the past and talks about clearing the likes of Carswell and Hamilton from the party. I perhaps understand some animosity towards Carswell but again I ask what has Hamilton done wrong? Also, how would Kassam go down up North? I am not sure about that either unless he were to choose a Deputy who would be more suitable up there.

You see there are so many questions around him and too many unknowns, but as time is running out perhaps we should be glad he wants to do the job, and not go with our gut instincts.

GEOFFREY CHARLES ELLIOTT.
on October 17, 2016 at 10:04 pm

This guy hasn’t got a snowball’s chance in hell of becoming our leader.
Believe me he’s just not going to unite the party,and will definitely not appeal to the very people in my own area of Rhondda,Cynon,Taff who are the former dissatisfied Labour voters and members who voted for Brexit with us,whom we are now targeting.The same goes for the North of England,he will go down like a lead ballon.For him to say that he wants to clear the likes of Carswell and Hamilton,who have actually been elected,just shows that he is prepared to continue with the damn infighting.I totally agree Neil has done
nothing wrong whatsoever,and for those of us who know a little more on the way he was initially set up by Al Fayed and the conspiracy between him and the Gaurdian Newspaper,which was instigated by War Criminal Blair,believe that Neil Hamilton is in fact totally innocent.With Neil as our leader in the Welsh Assembly,we have the most experienced Politician there.He leads a great team who are all head and shoulders above everyone else.
I know a little of the rivalry that exists between Nigel and Neil,but this cannot
now contine,both for the future of the Party and my dream that with the right
leader we still can become the official opposition to the remainiacs headed by Sharia May
Finally I must again reiterate that I truly and honestly believe that Raheem
Is just not the right person to lead us,and a vote for him is in fact a waisted vote.Myself,like many of us who originally wanted Paul Nutall to become our new leader(and still do),we have other good people,such as Lisa Duffy,and
Bill Etheridge,and of course not forgetting Suzanne,who is now back in the running has a really good chance of becoming our new leader.
I rest my case,Geoff.Elliott UKIP,Pontypridd.

Lee Moore
on October 17, 2016 at 4:02 pm

Kassam was the one who broke the “news” about the scuffle.
Kassam broke that news to the media for his own gains.
He had stated earlier that day, in a tweet, that Woolfe & Gill were his “brothers”
What kind of “brother” goes to the press, with a story that Woolffe took off his jacket, etc etc, whereas Woolffe actually picked up his jacket, as we later found out, as he wasn’t wearing his jacket at the time!
I will still vote for Woolfe, as will many others.
There is nobody else that can hold a candle to him, for his media and stage presence, plus his knowledge and dextrity.
The main ones calling for Woolfe to be expelled, support other candidates & have done so through the other leadership election, they have a lot to gain by their “buddies” being elected.
Personally, I think this was set up to discredit Woolfe, I have met him on many, many occasions and find his as written above.
No other candidate has anything to offer, apart from more of the same, just like the NEC, most of them should be removed, as they stood against their own Leader, Nigel Farage, on many occasions, yes, discussion needs to be had on most things, but to stand against your Leader and leak anything that does not suit you, to the media, is beyond contempt and I for one, hope good, honest people, who support what UKIP stands for, get in this time and outnumber the ones who are permanently there, such as Carswell, who are using their puppets, ie: Hamilton, to do their bidding, as it makes UKIP look stupid and really puts people off from joining, never mind those who are already members, from supporting such people, with their controversial bluster and verbal diarrhoea!

Robert Gage
on October 16, 2016 at 12:31 pm

And meantime, a united UKIP is needed more than ever, as the Remainian sore-losers cynically try to scupper the Referendum result any way they can. Can we have a few heads banged together at the top as an imploding UKIP is the last thing this country needs. What a crying shame it all is.

Paul Icini
on October 16, 2016 at 8:45 am

I’m not a huge fan of Paul Oakden, but right now he’s one of the few people trying to hold things together and he did a good job following Dian’s resignation and the EU parliament fracas. Leave Paul alone, at least until we have a new leader and he or she can confirm him in office or make a new appointment.
If the EC has Nigel on the books as leader, then pro tempore, that’s what he is and we have to live with it.

We simply have to “want” whoever is elected as new leader, if we don’t get behind the new one, we may as well all become independents, the party will be fatally damaged. The membership is not nearly as divided as the management, possibly because we have no direct financial stake in the election result. No doubt we have differences but if the desire for a better sort of national governance, electoral system, the provision of a more honest opposition and the need to ensure a proper Brexit all fail to hold us together, than what’s the point of us anyway ?
Our most serious problem was Nigel, Paul N and Steve all stepping down at the same time, before we had replacements. Sorry, but I consider that to be a selfish act, which makes me feel somewhat used. I do see that they have every right to lay down a heavy burden and acknowledge the super work they did for us…but we all worked for them too, without expecting to be paid for it.
To my surprise ( because he’s unknown to the public) right now Kassam is looking quite a good candidate, which is more than those who previously stood do. Sadly Steven has now gone too far, the EU incident was a mistake too many.
It matter not what I or anyone else thinks, one we have voted we must stand by the result for a while or go under. It is possible to change leaders again after a year or two, the Tories do it all the time. The new incumbent will not be Nigel, who was impossible to replace for good reasons.

I suppose you are right Paul Oakden is the only one at the top holding things together at the moment and given the latest events that must be quite tough, but he still needs to be more open about what is going on with the members though. We have seen what secrecy does, it looks like underhanded deals are being made and it is certainly not democratic.

You are right let’s face it, it was a very selfish act. They had all been there all that time through all the real hard times, then they all walked away together without even a genuine reason for doing so. It is not good enough and now Nigel seems to be reluctantly running the show.

I am not sure about Raheem Kassam myself, has he just been put there to replace Steven Woolfe, I am not 100% sure of his motives and a bit worried that he wants to allow more extreme people to join the party. That is certainly not going to to improve the image of the party IMHO.

Lee Moore
on October 17, 2016 at 4:07 pm

Kassam was the one who broke the “news” about the scuffle.
Kassam broke that news to the media for his own gains.
He had stated earlier that day, in a tweet, that Woolfe & Gill were his “brothers”
What kind of “brother” goes to the press, with a story that Woolffe took off his jacket, etc etc, whereas Woolffe actually picked up his jacket, as we later found out, as he wasn’t wearing his jacket at the time!
I will still vote for Woolfe, as will many others.
There is nobody else that can hold a candle to him, for his media and stage presence, plus his knowledge and dextrity.
The main ones calling for Woolfe to be expelled, support other candidates & have done so through the other leadership election, they have a lot to gain by their “buddies” being elected.
Personally, I think this was set up to discredit Woolfe, I have met him on many, many occasions and find his as written above.
No other candidate has anything to offer, apart from more of the same, just like the NEC, most of them should be removed, as they stood against their own Leader, Nigel Farage, on many occasions, yes, discussion needs to be had on most things, but to stand against your Leader and leak anything that does not suit you, to the media, is beyond contempt and I for one, hope good, honest people, who support what UKIP stands for, get in this time and outnumber the ones who are permanently there, such as Carswell, who are using their puppets, ie: Hamilton, to do their bidding, as it makes UKIP look stupid and really puts people off from joining, never mind those who are already members, from supporting such people, with their controversial verbal bluster!

Dee
on October 15, 2016 at 9:02 pm

Donald, It was my understanding from reading Dr. Slivnik’s resignation letter that things were going wrong long before the resignations of Nigel and Paul.
Meanwhile, when we are needed most as a party, with Leave getting watered down more by the minute, we have no leader, no spokespeople, all we have is a membership desperate for things to be sorted out.
The only bright spot is in Wales, where the AM’s are the only ones left carrying the UKIP flag.
-I’m wondering how long we are going to limp along in this really depressing way, and whose job is actually is to try and restore some sort of order.

David
on October 16, 2016 at 1:07 am

A mess for UKIP members and everyone else who voted to leave but it hands a great advantage to government. It would be wise to consider who are the traitors within. Politics is a dirty business and every government and every party has them. I don’t know enough to point my finger but surely there are party members who have a good idea?

I feel at this point in time we have to stop looking for traitors, it seems a negative pursuit and waste of energy at the moment. For all we know there may be any, but if there are they have a habit of ‘outing’ themselves given time.
We do have to stop this ‘navel gazing’ like what the Labour party are doing all the time, in doing so we take our eye off the ball, which is what the government are up to re Brexit. Actually, I don’t like the term Brexit because it now gets confused with this silly notion of a hard Brexit or a soft Brexit. What a load of rubbish that is. When you ask people who have voted to leave whether they wanted a hard or a soft one, they just reply they simply want to leave the EU full stop. So now I just call it ‘leave’ because that is what they asked us, and that is what we want.

After all, when you leave a job to move on to another one you do not turn round and say “Oh, by the way can I keep a bit of it going and sign a new contract with you,” do you? So surely this is a similar thing.

David
on October 16, 2016 at 11:47 am

Indeed “leave” is leave and any of their “soft” options just frustrate that process. May, for all her fine words, doesn’t seem to accept that yet.

Lee Moore
on October 17, 2016 at 4:16 pm

Yes, we in Wales know exactly who are trying to ruin our party, a handful of them and their master in the HoC.
These people need removing and not given any more air time to create division in the party.
I joined a nice party in UKIP, 3 years ago it was a great party, until Carswell talked the NEC traitors, into letting Hamilton stand for the Welsh Assembly, it all went downhill from there.
Yes, Nigel bought Hamilton into UKIP, but kept him out of main stream politics, as he knew he had made a big mistake by letting him in, but Carswell endorsed him and gave him a chance to lead Wales.
BANG!!!
Since then, there has been merry hell here in Wales, it is terrible, hamilton gate-crashes every local meeting and his puppets send people to “spy” in meetings, we cannot say or do anything, without it going back to Hamilton, now this is filtering through to the party as a whole and I for one, will not keep my thoughts to myself, as to who is to blame!

You may be right that perhaps things were starting to go a bit wrong before the resignations but why? It just does not make sense, my slant on it is that they did not expecting to win and therefore did not have a plan when they did, a bit like the government were caught out too.

Or perhaps they had already decided that once their chief objective had been reached that was it for them, and they wanted to pass the mantle on to someone else. There is just one problem with that, which is you need to have some sort of mission statement, and the party machine in some sort of order to back it up, we seem to have neither at the moment.

I agree with you that the membership are getting desperate for someone to step forward and take control and carry on our mission of leaving the EU. To be honest it is getting to the stage where I feel like almost stepping into the breach myself, I am so desperate for something to happen. It is so frustrating sitting here and seeing it all go wrong, but my saving grace is the branch I now belong to, we are going to soldier on and try and increase our membership here in London. As that will be no easy task we are going to have to come up with new ideas, we are all looking forward to the challenge as we have a lot of ‘healing’ to do in our branch as well.

My argument is if we can do it and as you say if Wales can do it, then why on Earth can’t the higher echelons do it, but there again there is an old saying; ‘United we stand but divided we fall’, and I think that and over sized egos of some officials are playing out here.

Lee Moore
on October 17, 2016 at 4:30 pm

Dee, the UKIP ones in Wales are what has started all of this.
It is mayhem in Wales.
We in Wales are crying it out to be stopped.
The Wales team are killing the party!

Vivian Evans
on October 17, 2016 at 4:37 pm

Could you be so kind and give readers examples of the ‘mayhem in Wales’, and how ‘the Wales team are killing the party’?
Your examples ought to be a bit more substantial than ‘Neil Hamilton gate-crashing every local meeting’ and ‘his puppets sending ‘spies’ …’.
Thanks.

This is all very interesting, who are you? How come you have not said anything before? We have only been hearing and seeing good things about Wales, so we need you to tell us more and it must be proved by facts. When and where are the meetings you are talking about and name names other than Hamilton.

I am afraid at the moment I am tending not to believe you, I think you are commenting here to muddy the waters. Shame on you if you are, you will get found out!

GEOFFREY CHARLES ELLIOTT..
on October 18, 2016 at 2:03 am

Lee we have both defended UKIP on the very same articles written in that
left wing rag,Wales Online.However I must say that your comments here on
UKIP DAILY,do not do you any favours whatsoever.In fact your comments are indeed both unhelpful,unnecessary,and unsubstantiated.They do nothing to promote or defend UKIP,to the contrary,your comments are more likely to cause more infighting and division within my beloved Party.
Lee if you care at all about UKIP,I urge you not to post any more negative comments about the Party,you surely must know that this can only provide our enemies with further ammunition to attack us and everything we hope to
achieve and accomplish.
Geoff.Elliott,UKIP,Pontypridd.

David
on October 15, 2016 at 1:22 pm

Interesting….

I’m looking forward to Part 2 (and the rest if there are any) but so far it does not look good.

The more we look at the situation at the top of the party, the more it becomes evident as to why it does not appear to be functioning properly. In my view it became a mess the minute Nigel Farage and Paul Nutall resigned at the same time. That’s when I found out we had a new Party Chairman as well. I do not remember being informed of the departure of the old one and subsequent replacement with Paul Oakden, it came as quite a shock as I thought the members should have at least been consulted about that.

But let us go back to the two sudden resignations of both the leader and the Deputy leader at the same time, surely that cannot be allowed without some consultation as to who is going to run the party in the meantime whilst elections are going on. Consequently, the party was left completely rudderless and Diane James was expected to come in and pick up all the pieces and put them back together, with no one to guide her it seems to me.

No wonder she could not cope, Nigel was swanning off to America and I am not sure what Paul Nuttall was doing, but did they offer to give the assistance she so badly needed. After all, it was Nigel and co. that wanted her to replace him.

So, now we are all left very disappointed and bewildered and find ourselves in the midst of yet another leadership contest, with some people looking understandably reluctant to stand. That could indeed lead to the wrong people may standing and to the person most unsuited to the job actually getting it.

I do remember Neil Hamilton being interviewed by Andrew Neil re this leadership fiasco, and he said at the time that like you have explained above that at the present time UKIP is leaderless. It seems he was right as he stated Nigel had in fact resigned formally from the party and Diane was not registered as the new leader, so I suppose you could say we have not had a leadership contest yet and that was just a trial run.

I just hope for the sake of the party we get it right this time, and the new leader does want the job and the members do want the new leader.

Search

Search for:

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Please leave this field empty

Email *

Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all the latest from Independence Daily in your inbox.